* Mon, 8 Oct 2007 17:38:52 -0400Experience of convincing experienced patch author, that some things in the patch are wrong :) [] I vote for more little summaries in the `Subject'(again). Long, boring threads with whole threading part of screen being empty due to same subjects isn't fun, when some of thousands of messages can have interesting stuff inside. And it's easy not only for mailing list readers now, and for archive readers also; readers of the www search results (who ever that may be): google.com/search?q=reviewed+crashkernel First hit on the review of the patch, i happened to make. And i just thought "hell, just string parsing, what can be more simply?", yet there was productive discussion and bug fixing. After i saw convincing statements about testing, i've placed review mark. Though i'm really "unimportant" random hacker. -- -o--=O`C #oo'L O <___=E M -
| Lennart Sorensen | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
| Jan Engelhardt | intel iommu (Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23) |
| Dmitry Torokhov | Re: 2.6.21-rc5-mm3 |
git: | |
| Arjan van de Ven | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 18/37] dccp: Support for Mandatory options |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
